Great Australian Party

[b_auspol]

Great Australian Party (GAP)
https://www.greataustralianparty.com.au/
 

Okay, time to take a preemptive shower.

A quick look at the history of the party: GAP was formed by Rod Culleton in April 2019 to contest the Australian federal election. If you don’t remember why these words send a shiver up your spine, Culleton is one of the many political figures who got caught up in the Great Disqualification Games of the 45th parliament, though in his case he got booted for being a bankrupt, not for dual citizenship. In the short time Culleton WAS in the Senate, he managed to resign from One Nation to sit as an independent, because of course he did. Unhappy about being ruled ineligible, Culleton appealed the decision. Then appealed again. When the High Court told him (politely) to give it up, he threatened to appeal it to the Privy Council to overrule the High Court and get his seat back. For those of you who aren’t as familiar with the various appeal options in the Australian legal system, that option ceased in 1988. The High Court is the final arbiter. I don’t recall hearing if he actually managed to lodge anything with the Privy Council, but if he did I’m sure it’s a delight to read. He’s been referring to himself as “Senator in Exile” since his exclusion, which was a CHOICE.

The Great Australian Party is Culleton’s personal microparty, featuring the many ideas of his that are too radical and unpalatable to be One Nation policies. These include the fact that he’s a sovereign citizen. Let that sit with you for a minute.

Now while I can usually spot sov-cit thinking (it’s pretty distinctive), my track record at guessing what they MEAN is only so-so, because frankly there’s little interpretation published on the Australian quirks of the movement. From what I’ve seen of GAP, they are very hung up on the original wording of the Australian Constitution and the Magna Carta and very suspicious of the judicial system. There is definitely a tendency towards wanting The People to make decisions (calls for referenda, a heavy demand for jury trials only, parliament being able to overrule the judiciary). But really I’m mostly guessing as their meaning most of the time.

The first thing I notice on the website is that there is, amusingly, a page titled “GAP Constitutional Standing” under their About. They just leave the sov-cit stuff out there under About? SERIOUSLY?

Point one on this page is a howler. “The Party’s purpose shall be as follows: To uphold the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK)”. Oh god oh god I can’t stop giggling. For context, the party literally lists the act as part of their logo. I suspect this is some weird signal that the 1988 Australia Acts aren’t constitutional? Or something? I cannot tell but this is like a flashing neon sign that they want to tell me about the Magna Carta shortly.

Also apparently Parliament should be the final court of appeal above the High Court and get to reverse their decisions. Look, I get that you have a grievance and a bone to pick with the High Court, but that is not the solution to your problem, Rod Culleton. And jury trials should be mandated to enforce the separation of Church and State. I’m actually confused what this is about; possibly a conspiracy that certain members of the bench are taking their religion into account when making decisions? Oh and also there’s something about bankruptcy thrown in here that I presume would somewhat ameliorate Culleton’s financial situation vis-a-vis standing for election. And a government owned bank.

Look. I realise this party is a coping mechanism for Culleton more than an actual political unit that expects to get into government, but the blatant intentions of all of this is astonishing.

Okay, off to the policy page now that I’ve indulged myself. The first thing you see is a video summary of their policies. I’ll note that the video consists of painfully cheery music that you probably want to mute. The first thing in the video is “The Commonwealth Constitution dictates that you are the supreme, absolute, uncontrollable authority in this country.” This is absolute nonsense and sov-cit wingnuttery. The Aus Constitution is very specific about what it protects and definitely does not contain “you can do what you like, the constitution says so”. They go on to claim that taxation is voluntary, that private banks are going to fail and steal all our money without a public bank, that local governments shouldn’t exist, something about legislators that says they have to be members of Parliament (uhhhh I thought they were), being weirdly hung up on the Constitution, think some laws are invalidly made (do they mean delegated legislation? I can tell there’s a code here for something they’re unhappy about but I can’t figure out what), think all decisions of judges (but not juries) should be able to be overturned by the parliament, and a bunch of other things.

OH WAIT CRIME REFORM. Right. So they want to remove “victimless crimes” like traffic offences and drug fines. Well. Personally I can see both sides of this. On one hand I see the “is this really hurting people” and “aren’t these usually largely enforced on vulnerable populations” points, but on the other hand, the reason we have traffic offences is to try and stop people doing risky things that contribute to people dying. I’m not against trying to reform laws so that police don’t have a suite of offences to use for “I don’t like you and I think you’re acting suspiciously”, but I don’t think “wheeee no more road rules!” is the right way to go about it. “Eliminate uncorroborated evidence being admitted to court”. Hell no. Evidence is a difficult thing, but you know what crimes frequently don’t have corroborative evidence? Sexual assault. Domestic and family violence. Abuse. These things are hard enough to try, and you want to throw out “the victim said”? Also they want to elect all judges and magistrates. Now while I will be the first to admit the Australian system of appointment isn’t perfect, is opaque and secretive, and could be improved as it’s a notorious old boy’s club particularly at the highest levels, the US shows voting on judges and magistrates is no better and probably worse. How do you expect the general public to evaluate this?

Also apparently we should not force medication on people, including vaccinations, fluoride and involuntary mental health admissions. Oh great, more conspiracies. I will admit, anti-vax rhetoric this particular year is going to jar for me. I don’t expect the State of WA to mandate vaccination, but this whole category falls under management of public health, which is considered at a population level as well as an individual level, and in it, decisions are often made in the interests of the population instead of the individual. We’ve all had plenty of examples of that in the past 12 months.

Family court reform! Oh boy, this is just one long stream of things I disagree with. GAP wants to eliminate the family court and rely on mediation counselling instead. While there is literally not a single person who interacts with the Family Court who doesn’t have ideas on how to improve it, there are very serious reasons why it’s a specialist court and not a general one. For one thing, it’s certainly the jurisdiction with the highest percentage of minors interacting with it. Unfortunately, not everything under its purview can be dealt with simply by mediation, and the suggestion that the Family Court doesn’t force everyone possible through mediation before hearings is simply ludicrous to anyone who’s dealt with the Australian court systems. Alternative dispute resolution is pursued EVERYWHERE. You can turn up in front of a magistrate with evidence that two parties will never, ever, agree and they’ll still send you off to mediation to get a certificate to say this can’t be resolved. The other reason you can’t just eliminate the Family Court all together is that the legal system has a separate check to make sure minors aren’t being exploited/forgotten – matters involving those who can’t consent on their own have to be formally signed off by a judge or magistrate after any decision is reached.

Now that I’ve survived all of that: a lot of this is not relevant at a state election, of course. On to their more detailed policies. I’m skipping around and missing a few of their more federal-only policies.

And then I open the Animals policy and it seems to have been written by someone completely different. I honestly could agree with 99% of this. It’s about animal welfare and is a balanced policy focused on promoting well being, ensuring protections against exploitation, and regulating things. They do mention “An end to cruel or unnecessary use of animals for teaching and research purposes” which as always looks like a flag for “no experimentation on animals at all”, because animal use in clinical settings is heavily regulated already, but that’s an ongoing argument. You could have told me this policy came from any major party and I wouldn’t be shocked.

Communication, IT and the Arts – what a grouping! They don’t like the ABC; it’s biased media. Analogue TV is excellent, we don’t need digital. I have to remind you that this party was formed in 2019, and analogue was completely switched off in 2013 – I think you’re fighting a lost battle here. They think digital is too expensive for Australians. Again, I’d like to reiterate this policy is written like it’s from the mid 2000s, not 2019 when the party was formed. Don’t sell off any more of Telstra, don’t sell Australia Post.

Oh god, I can’t help it – they want Australia only to sign treaties after people agree in a referendum? SERIOUSLY? This is why we elect a government, GAP. To represent us and make decisions so that they don’t have to come running to the people for opinions on important issues like this. We also shouldn’t be funding foreign aid: “Surplus to foreign aid which will be reviewed & provided only in Australian made products & services, to those in genuine need” which is an unworkable policy if ever I saw one.

Law and Justice just makes me mad, because they are so suspicious that there is illegal law making that is not ‘constitutionally compliant’ going on here. Please stop dogwhistling and tell me what you mean. Also jury trials for everything. All the time. No opting out. Sentencing also should come from the jury (?!!). Because screw any proportionality or predictability between cases, let’s leave it up to the general public to work out where in the spectrum of possible penalties the case should fall. “Naming of young criminals who are serial offenders to ensure accountability and treating bullying as a crime.” OH MY FUCKING GOD NO. Yes, let us name and shame minor children so that there is even less hope of rehabilitation for them. God. And then back to minor things like “Desecration of the Australian Flag to be a criminal offence” because that is really something we need to spend time worrying about. Please let me know, GAP, is tying the flag around your neck and running around in public considered ‘desecration’?

Primary industries: GAP would like us to produce more at home, and have regulations and agreements from marketing boards for fairer pricing. They also want more value-add processing done in Australia, rather than exporting raw materials – this I’m happy to support, as the end product should be more valuable. They really don’t like imports, and they are worried we import too much food – though as I recall, we are actually pretty secure in that regard and are a net exporter, not importer. They’d also like more focus on native plants, herbs and animals, for environmental, indigenous and international export reasons. Sure. They’re against live animal exports to countries that don’t meet world’s best practice. Basically, this is another reasonable set of policies clearly written by someone who knows about the issues and concerns of primary industry. I’d suspect GAP’s constituency consists of a goodly number of country folk.

They also have a policy on water, which tracks, and mostly consists of “manage it better”. “The main problem is more one of unequal distribution and storage rather than shortage”, which I don’t agree with, but I’m interested to see their storage ideas for dealing with floodwaters. Pipe treated grey water inland for irrigation?? Also charging farmers for storage of rainwater on their properties is wrong. They are also worried that Australia is planning to sell its water catchments to foreign interests. This feels like a set of specifically farmer grievances. Also they are very suspicious of fluoride in water.

I dipped into transport for long enough to notice that yes, among their other policies, they want consistency in rail gauges. As anyone who has heard me on the topic of the Australian Constitution knows, I tend to characterise it as “weirdly obsessed with railways”. Glad to see the GAP are also calling for consistent rail gauges across the country, as the Constitution wants. This may be the only consistent thing from their obsession with the document that I’ve found.

Seniors policy! They want to call everyone over 55 a ‘senior’ and not use any other terminology, which they consider offensive. Everyone should get a full pension. Retirement should be 60, with completely free healthcare. A National super provider as competition for the private and industry funds. They also want the removal of GST for seniors, though I can’t tell if it’s for everything or just for services used by seniors. Basically, look after our seniors, provide everything for them. Also bring back war widow pensions. I was unaware that we had that many war widows left that this was a concern, especially combined with “everyone gets a full pension”.

Oh here’s one where I see the intention but laugh hysterically: “GAP will cap the value of senior’s family home & investment properties at original purchase price, so as to protect them from spiralling inflation at a time when their incomes are restricted.” Oh yes, protect the investment properties too. I know there is a problem with council rates in areas that have become more expensive over time, but this is unworkable. You’re suggesting you cap the ‘value’ of homes at purchase price? So if it was bought in the 60s or 70s for $10,000, that’s the value of the property as far as Centrelink or taxation goes? Ahahahahahaha. I know that the idea of needing to sell or move out of a home someone has always lived in is a hard one for seniors when they can’t afford to or need to downsize, but I don’t think this is the solution.

Firearms! Oh good I get an answer on “do they want to kill me”. “GAP believes in firearms ownership as a right, not a privilege.” Okay then. That’s not a majority view in this country, but go on. They want the removal of red tape around firearms (yes, because LESS REGULATION involving guns sounds like what we need). Paintball and airsoft should not be regulated like firearms. Once you’re licenced for a category of firearm purchase, there should be no further restrictions. You should be able to carry a handgun via a permit. No restrictions on taking firearms across borders. Oh here we go: “GAP will work to establish secured depots of firearms and ammunition throughout every town and city, ready for issue to the civilian population in the event of an attack on the people of Australia by a foreign power.” Yes because civilian militias are so useful. We are definitely likely to be attacked by a foreign power in a way that means we need to take to the streets with firearms. You absolute nincompoops.

Their indigenous policies involve a “National Tribal Federation” which should look over all land rights legislation and prevent further extinguishment of native title (if I’m reading this correctly). It’s a bit confusing, as the terminology they’re using is not quite either the standard legal terms or what you see coming out of Indigenous communities and rights organisations. Oh hah, they say you should vote “to close the GAP”, look at that play on words. This feels rather ‘heart in the right place but disengaged from what’s being asked for’ to me? I tend to feel any policy that doesn’t engage directly with things like the Uluru Statement from the Heart is not really listening to the community, at this point, no matter how well intentioned.

Taxation and we are back to the wingnuttery. Abolish the GST, income tax and remove compulsory super. Oh boy. We shouldn’t be borrowing money overseas. Instead everything can be paid for with a “21st Century Electronic Transaction Tax”, whatever that is. Oh, I love when parties just decide they can set up a whole new system. You always know when someone namechecks King O’Malley in a policy it’s going to be a doozy; not even Labor do that. Bring back the state-owned Commonwealth Bank.

Also let us be frank, their social media is currently a swirling morass of “the US election was stolen!” “COVID is just the flu!” “Don’t enforce vaccination!” I’m not even going to spell things out any further there, because we’ve all lived the past year and can interpret all that for ourselves.


Any Predictions?

Oh boy do we ever!

The Great Australian Party is convinced COVID-19 is a plot to get them to pay taxes. They prepare several sov-cit documents for the government that still require Australian hospitals to treat them, but only by citizen medical practitioners. It’s the dirty foreigners fault.

You cannot get COVID-19 if you are exposed to the virus in an admiralty court.

I mean, you can only put the ALL CAPS Strawman into quarantine anyway, not the flesh and blood human being...

They will also appeal to the Queen’s Privy Council if anyone tries to make them go into quarantine.

The paper personhood enforced by the government might have COVID-19 and be ordered into self quarantine, but I, a free and natural man, have rights under the Magna Carta to do whatever I want and am perfectly healthy.

Now GAP is smart enough to only post about this on social media, not their website, but please, please don’t bother looking at the comments on their facebook page. I saw plenty of sovereign citizen nuttiness, though at present it’s mostly focused on COVID-19 not existing and vaccines not being necessary.


Is this party trying to kill me?

Yes. Their gun policies do not make me feel safe at all. They are advocating for handguns to be available for the general public to carry and for stores of firearms in cities. Also they don’t believe in a disease that has, to date, killed over 2 million humans in the past year.


Is this party trying to harm me?

Just the desire for more guns and vaccine refusal harms me.


Conclusion:

There are a small handful of things that are interesting about GAP. You can see where their members and hypothetical voters are: older farmers who want the basics of life run by the government but are suspicious of regulation outside of what they know. They certainly believe in Australian government ownership of (some) infrastructure and utilities such as banks and telecommunications, and have a comprehensive set of policies on animal welfare and primary industries.

Unfortunately they are let down by being absolute sov-cit conspiracy weirdoes obsessed with the idea that Australian laws are not being made legitimately and a fundamental mistrust of our judicial system, to the point they want parliament to be able to overturn anything the judiciary does. Of course they don’t particularly trust parliament either and want people’s referendums on issues that are currently cabinet decisions. They don’t believe in COVID. And they like guns far, far too much.

Do not vote for this party. I would suggest they are among the most dangerous people running for the WA election this year – not only are they far right in their policies, their policies don’t make sense and they promote dangerous conspiracies. Straight to the bottom of the ticket.